US Intelligence, Inc.

Edward Snowden's leaks of US classified information have demonstrated how little control there may be over individuals within the intelligence community. More important, Snowden's revelations have highlighted the extent to which the US government has handed over responsibility for highly sensitive programs to for-profit entities.

SINGAPORE – Among the stories and rumors prompted by Edward J. Snowden’s leaking of classified material – whistleblowing or treason, depending on where you stand – the revelations that may actually lead to a policy change concern the extent to which private companies now carry out intelligence gathering and analysis in the United States.

Around a third of the 1.4 million people with “top secret” US security clearances are contractors, according to the Office of the US Director of National Intelligence. We now know that this includes individuals like Snowden, whose hiring and firing by the technology consultancy Booz Allen Hamilton is itself the subject of an investigation.

Intelligence contracting is an industry worth tens of billions of dollars, and companies like Booz Allen have made it central to their business models, staffing their executive suites with former senior intelligence officials. Booz Allen’s current vice chairman, Mike McConnell, left the company to serve as Director of National Intelligence from 2007 to 2009, returning to the firm immediately after stepping down.

Simon Chesterman is the dean of the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law and the author of One Nation Under Surveillance: A New Social Contract to Defend Freedom Without Sacrificing Liberty.

Classic problem: there is a set, call it homogenous for the sake of argument. A small subset of that set exhibits a specific characteristic. How do you go about finding and identifying that subset?

The set is all people who work with classified information. The subset is those people who are untrustworthy.

The telecommunications companies are not collecting intelligence. They own and manage the carrier network, they own the voice and data that traverses their networks, and therefore they can access any and all of it at will.

When the eight hundred pound gorilla, the US government, comes and asks (!) for unfettered access to that data, exactly what real option is there to decline that request? In a real world scenario, not much!

The issues around the Snowden case are not technological; they are moral. Simply put, what are the intentions and motivations of the individuals who have access to that data? For example, if Mr. Chesterman has been making regular, but secret, contributions to his local charity, and I come into possession of that knowledge, I can use that information to praise him or (potentially) to exploit or disgrace him. That's the core issue with Snowden.

Yes, the government 'snooping on citizens' violates the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution (Google). What attorney wants to litigate that case?

What Snowden did was both a violation of his terms of employment and very dangerous to the USA, but more importantly it was dangerous to Snowden. Anyone want to guess what Snowden is doing in Russia? Is the Russian Federation just allowing him to languish in a hotel room, or have they already successfully extracted every single detail of the US intelligence community from his frail body?

The economic reality is that contractors exist because the government cannot and will not recruit and pay talented people to work in their bureaucratic and highly structured environment. If the intelligence business, if you don't trust someone, don't hand them a loaded gun. Pretty simple, and you can bet that Booz is being reminded of that daily.

I rarely agree with Mr. Assange but he found the right words. Our US allies spy on European citizens and corporations in a totalitarian fashion that would make the STASI ashamed and they cry and hue about a person who leaked the fact to the public. I wonder why Europeans don't have the guts to tell it's unacceptable. I think we should grant this courageous person political asylum and call the US actions the crime they are against humanity.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.